JOURNAL BROWSE
Search
Advanced SearchSearch Tips
Effects of Hybrid and Maturity on Maize Stover Ruminal Degradability in Cattle Fed Different Diets
facebook(new window)  Pirnt(new window) E-mail(new window) Excel Download
 Title & Authors
Effects of Hybrid and Maturity on Maize Stover Ruminal Degradability in Cattle Fed Different Diets
Arias, S.; Di Marco, O.N.; Aello, M.S.;
  PDF(new window)
 Abstract
The effect of maize hybrid (Suco and Dekalb 765, DK 765), maturity stage (milk, and 1/2 milk line, ) and animal diet (Diet 1: 70% lucerne hay+30% maize silage; Diet 2: 50% maize silage+20% sunflower meal+30% maize grain) on ruminal stover dry matter (DM) degradability was studied. Additionally, morphological and chemical plant composition was evaluated. Fodder samples ground at 2 mm were incubated in three Holstein steers (400 kg body weight) using the in situ technique. Ruminal degradation kinetics was studied and the effective degradability (ED) was estimated for an assumed kp of 5%/h. The in situ data was analyzed in a complete randomized block design with the animals as blocks. Significant interactions between hybriddiet and maturitydiet on kinetic digestion parameters were detected. In Diet 1, hybrids did not differ in degradable fraction, kd or ED, although a minor difference (p<0.05) in the soluble fraction was found (25.5 and 23.2% for Suco and DK 765, respectively). In Diet 2, the DK 765 had greater degradable fraction (p<0.001) but smaller (p<0.01) kd than Suco, without differences in the soluble fraction or in ED. Anticipating the harvest increased ED of stover from 37.5% in to 44.6% in (average values across hybrids and diets) due to the increase (p<0.001) in the soluble fraction (: 22.6%, : 28.8%). It is concluded that hybrids had similar stover in situ DM degradability and that soluble fraction represent the main proportion of degradable substrates. Advancing the date of harvesting may not improve the in situ DM degradability of whole maize plant silage since the increase in stover quality is counteracted by the depression in the grain-to-stover ratio. The diet of the animal consuming silage might not improve stover utilization either.
 Keywords
Maize Silage;Stage of Maturity;Hybrids;In situ Degradability;
 Language
English
 Cited by
 References
1.
AFRC. 1993. Energy and protein requirements of ruminants. CAB International, Wallingford, UK 159 pp. (An advisory manual prepared by the AFRC Technical Committee on responses to nutrients).

2.
Andrae, J. C., C. W. Hunt, G. T. Pritchard, L. R. Kennington, J. H. Harrison, W. Kezar and W. Mahanna. 2001. Effect of hybrid, maturity, and mechanical processing of corn silage on intake and digestibility by beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 79:2268-2275.

3.
AOAC. 1990. Official Methods of Analysis (15th Ed.). Association of Official Analytical Chemists, Washington, DC.

4.
Arieli, A., S. J. Mabjeesh, Z. Shabi, I. Bruckental, Y. Aharoni, S. Zamwel and H. Tagari. 1998. In situ assessment of degradability of organic matter in the rumen of dairy cow. J. Dairy Sci. 81:1985-1990.

5.
Bal, M. A., R. D. Shaver, H. Al-Jobeile, J. G. Coors and J. G. Lauer. 2000. Corn silage hybrid effects on intake, digestion and milk production by dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 83:2849-2858.

6.
Ballard, C. S., E. D. Thomas, D. S. Tsang, P. Mandebvu, C. J. Sniffen, M. I. Endres and M. P. Carter. 2001. Effect of corn silage hybrid on dry matter yield, nutrient and milk production by dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 84:442-452.

7.
Bodine, T. N., H. T. Purvis and D. L. Lalman. 2001. Effects of supplement type on animal performance forage intake, digestion, and ruminal measurement of growing beef cattle. J. Anim. Sci. 79:1041-1051.

8.
Buxton, D. and D. Redfearn. 1997. Plant limitations to fiber digestion and utilization. In: 37th Annual Ruminant Nutrition Conference: ‘New development in forages science contributing to enhanced fiber utilization by ruminants’. Washington, April 1996.

9.
Canton, D. and D. V. Dhuyvetter. 1997. Influence of energy supplementation on grazing ruminants: requirements and responses. J. Anim. Sci. 75:533-542.

10.
Daynard, T. B. and R. B. Hunter. 1975. Relationships among whole-plant moisture, grain moisture, dry matter yield, and quality of whole-plant corn silage. Can. J. Plant Sci. 55:77-84.

11.
De Visser, H., C. J. Van Der Koelen and A. M. Van Vuuren. 1998. Starch supplementation of grass harvested at two stages of maturity prior to ensiling: intake, digestion, and degradability by dairy cows. J. Dairy Sci. 81:2221-2227.

12.
Di Marco, O. N., M. S. Aello, M. Nomdedeu and S. Van Houtte. 2002. Effect of maize crop maturity on silage chemical composition and digestibility (in vivo, in situ and in vitro). Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 99:37-43.

13.
Flachowsky, G., W. Peyker, A. Schneider and K. Henkel. 1993. Fibre analyses and in sacco degradability of plants fractions of two corn varieties harvested at various times. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 43:41-50.

14.
Firdous, R. and A. H. Gilani. 1998. Effect of stage of growth and cultivar on chemical composition of whole maize plant and its morphological fractions. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 12:366-370.

15.
Heldt, J. S., R. J. Pruitt, P. S. Birkelo, P. S. Johnson and Z. W. Wicks. 1998. Evaluation of wheat middings as a supplement for beef cows grazing native winter range with differing forage availabilities. J. Anim. Sci. 76:378-387.

16.
Hoover, W. H. 1986. Chemical factors involved in ruminal fiber digestion. J. Dairy Sci. 69:2755-2766.

17.
Hunt, C. W., W. Kezar and R. Vinande. 1989. Yield, chemical composition and ruminal fermentability of corn whole plant, ear, and stover as affected by maturity. J. Prod. Agric. 2:357-361.

18.
Irlbeck, N. A., J. R. Russell, A. R. Hallauer and D. R. Buxton. 1993. Nutritive value and ensiling characteristics of maize stover as influenced by hybrid maturity and generation, plant density and harvest date. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 41:51-64.

19.
Johnson, L., J. H. Harrison, C. Hunt, K. Shinners, C. G. Dogget and D. Sapienza. 1999. Nutritive value of corn silage as affected by maturity and mechanical processing: A contemporary review. J. Dairy Sci. 82:2813-2825.

20.
Kim, J. D., C. H. Kwon and D. A. Kim. 2001. Yield and quality of silage corn as affected by hybrid maturity, planting date and harvest stage. Asian-Aust. J. Anim. Sci. 14:1705-1711.

21.
MacRae, J. E. and D. G. Armstrong. 1968. Enzyme method for determination of $\alpha$-linked glucose polymers in biological materials. J. Sci. Food. Agric. 19:578-581.

22.
McDonald, I. 1981. A revised model for estimation of protein degradability in the rumen. J. Agric. Sci., Camb. 96:251-252.

23.
$\Phi$rskov, E. R. and I. McDonald. 1979. The estimation of protein degradability in the rumen from incubation measurements weighted according to rate of passage. J. Agric. Sci., Camb. 92:499-503.

24.
Pichard, G. and J. A. Alcalde. 1990. Determinaci$\'{o}$n de carbohidratos no estructurales. In: (Ed. M. E. Ruiz, A. Ruiz), Nutrici$\'{o}$n de Rumiantes: Guía Metodol$\'{o}$gica de Investigaci$\'{o}$n. IICA, San Jos$\'{e}$ de Costa Rica, pp. 3-20.

25.
Ritchie, S., J. Hanway and G. Benson. 1996. How a corn plant develops? Spec. Rep. 48. Iowa State Univ. of Sci. and Technol., Coop. Ext. Serv., Ames.

26.
Russell, J. R. 1986. Influence of harvest date on the nutritive value and ensiling characteristics of maize stover. Anim. Feed Sci. Technol. 14:11-27. crossref(new window)

27.
SAS. 1996. Statistical Analysis Systems Institute Inc., SAS User’s Guide: Statistics, Cary N.C.

28.
Tilley, J. and R. Terry. 1963. A two stage technique for the in vitro digestion of forages crops. J. Br. Grassland Soc. 18:104-111.

29.
Tolera, A., F. Sundstøl and A. N. Said. 1998. The effect of stage of maturity on yield and quality of maize grain and stover. Anim. Feed Sci. Techol. 75:157-168.

30.
Van Soest, P. J., J. B. Robertson and B. A. Lewis. 1991. Methods for dietary fiber, neutral detergent fiber, and nonstarch polysaccharides in relation to animal nutrition. J. Dairy Sci. 74:3583-3597.

31.
Wilkinson, J. M. and R. H. Phipps. 1979. The development of plant components and their effects on the composition of fresh and ensiled forage maize. J. Agric. Sci., Camb. 92:485-491.